Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.

EDIT: When they release the 2010 GDP measurements, the Bay Area is going to see a massive increase in per capita income. The population count correlated to the GDP outcome will push it above almost every single place in the country (if it hasn't already) making it the wealthiest region of the country.

Little growth for San Jose which is only 945,000, and it's not surprising at all since there are all of vacant housing there. San Diego grew a little faster with 1,307,000. Again, no surprise there. I actually expect little or no growth from here on out. It's way overpriced in these region. What's going on, that everyone expected much faster growth? I pretty much knew all along. When I put my predictions, I had to post higher than I thought because the bloggers would really think that I'm nuts or just trolling. I had to play it safe. San Jose and San Diego are mature cities with decent downtowns.

Little growth for San Jose which is only 945,000, and it's not surprising at all since there are all of vacant housing there.

Yeah it seems like San Jose is going to have to wait another decade and a half or so (at least a decade) before it gets to join the 1 Million and up club.

Quote:

Originally Posted by durf

San Diego grew a little faster with 1,307,000. Again, no surprise there. I actually expect little or no growth from here on out. It's way overpriced in these region.

San Diego seems to have indefinitely held its spot over Dallas, and seems like that will be the case for another 10-15 years to come with the way things went this US Census.

Quote:

Originally Posted by durf

What's going on, that everyone expected much faster growth?

I think a lot of people put a lot of stock into their cities estimates. The entire rule of doing estimates from here on out, I'm taking it with a grain of salt from now on. It's really not worth believing them over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by durf

I pretty much knew all along. When I put my predictions, I had to post higher than I thought because the bloggers would really think that I'm nuts or just trolling. I had to play it safe. San Jose and San Diego are mature cities with decent downtowns.

Looks like a done deal to me. I think we know what to expect for the remaining places left. Especially with New York, Georgia, & Florida. I'm curious on Michigan though. Detroit City, MSA, & CSA in particular though.

EDIT: When they release the 2010 GDP measurements, the Bay Area is going to see a massive increase in per capita income. The population count correlated to the GDP outcome will push it above almost every single place in the country (if it hasn't already) making it the wealthiest region of the country.

We still have the issue of Stockton to contend with, and that's a double-edge sword cause it adds 685,306 to the Bay Area lifting the CSA population to 8,153.696. We'll have to wait and see if that actually happens.

I think a lot of people put a lot of stock into their cities estimates. The entire rule of doing estimates from here on out, I'm taking it with a grain of salt from now on. It's really not worth believing them over.

i think ppl put too much stock in the census. their method is no more accurate than the way most cities/states estimate their population.

Yeah but I mostly just consider that entire MSA to be a far reaching and expansive (very expansive and huge) suburb of Los Angeles (No offense to anyone living there). But here is the information on that though (see below).

I always forget how large the Inland Empire really is, it seems just shooting distance from San Francisco/Oakland MSA at this point. And given the trends of the last decade, poised to surpass it and compete directly with Phoenix MSA (similar in size).

Yeah but I mostly just consider that entire MSA to be a far reaching and expansive (very expansive and huge) suburb of Los Angeles (No offense to anyone living there). But here is the information on that though (see below).

I always forget how large the Inland Empire really is, it seems just shooting distance from San Francisco/Oakland MSA at this point. And given the trends of the last decade, poised to surpass it and compete directly with Phoenix MSA (similar in size).

I agree with you, and I still don't understand why the census bureau separated out the Inland Empire from LA from an MSA perspective. If you ever take a look at the 91, 60, 10, and 210 freeways on a morning rush hour, you KNOW that tons of people commute into LA/OC.

I just thought you were being comprehensive from an "MSA List" perspective and missed one.

Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.